Q what does the author identify as some of the drawbacks of modern versions of objects, such as phones?
They have a lot of buttons but they are not organized into correct compartments or that they lack visual signals that allow the user to operate the machine effectively. Some of the modern versions of objects do not provide users with the feedback. The author gave an example of how he attempted to change the temperature of his refrigerator, but he wasn’t able to do so because there were no immediate feedback that would tell him whether he is doing it correctly. Another problem is that the mapping between what the user knows about the physical world and how the machine should operate is not done in the right manner, due to the fact that manufacturers worry that the user would not understand if they draw a correct map of the machine, hence they provide the users with a simplified but incorrect map.
Q how is the notion of causality relevant to interactive web design?
Web sites should be organized in a manner that demonstrates how one function is a direct result of another function. For instance, in Illuminate, some of the signals does not show clear cause and effect since I wasn’t sure whether clicking on the hand icon (in order to show a hand raise) would turn it on or would turn it off and so I accidentally left the icon on several times without realizing it.
Q how does design relate to the notion of schema which learners create in their heads?
Assignment: Interface Design Critique
http://www.docstoc.com/MyDocs/
Who are the users?
Everyone, including teenagers, professional adults. Anyone who needs to display either creative stuff, legal documents, educational materials, etc.
Information chunk (gestalt principle, amount information)
For the tutorial (http://www.docstoc.com/MyDocs/), the organization is quite clear. They organize the contents into chunks using visual cues such as a group of bullets, using colors to highlight similar contents. They put all of the text-based possible functions on the left side and provided all of the graphical illustrations on the right side. They divided the main content into seven short, precise paragraphs rather than combining them into one long, hard-to-follow paragraph.
Relevance (graphics, content, reading level, text)
The graphics on the right side of the features definitely help the reader grasp the wordings. The content has materials that belong in the tutorial and they are very easy to read and understand. The texts support the graphics, though some of the headlines can be more detailed.
Labeling (visual with text)
I think that every graph deserves a title (or headline or caption) that allow the user know quickly what the graph is about. There were a few graphs that did not have titles. The texts that they have are accurately described by the visuals.
Consistency (visual, text)
The texts go along with the visual cues quite well. For instance, they use hand signals and arrows to pinpoint the places on the graphs where the texts made the references.
Detail (too much on one page or one screen)
There were a lot of contents on the screen, but I think that it is fine in this case. If they separate the contents into two screens, then the reader might lose track of the chunking. Putting all of the contents into one screen allows the user to know that they all belong in the same body rather than that different points are being made.
Other comments
Their tutorial site is better design than the homepage. The homepage has way too many contents and I did not know where to start since they seem to be placed in random manner.
On Interactivity
Orientation (Can you find the path, and know your way around?)
Yes. I know that the path is linear since they branch the materials with the texts on the left and the graphics on the right. The navigation is prominently displaced at the top.
Navigation (Branching)
The navigation consists of the main tab, the sub tab, the sub sub tab, and so on. This is quite easy to understand for me.
Functionality (Does it work?)
Yes. The navigation carries us to the right destinations.
Information access (Multiple entry and exit? Logical path?)
Due to the design of the tabs, the user can know exactly where he is in respect to the other contents. Whereas other sites have an opening windows that brings the user to areas in which they might feel unfamiliar due to the variants in the designs, this site have the same navigation at the exact same place in all of the pages.
Other comments
The interactivity is logical due to the flow of the information from one tab to another. But there is too much information on one page (except the tutorial page) and so it can confuse the reader as to which material should he read first.
On Screen Design
Attractive (first impression)
My first impression is that it is glossy (due to the bright colors), a little bit showoff as to what it can do. It is acceptable in terms of its organizations.
Resolution
Some of the graphics are too small and so the resolution is a little bit not good. The text has good resolution (they are not embedded onto the graphics but for most of the time they are placed outside of them)
Color
Soft bright colors that can be distractive at times.
Lay out
Layout on the tutorial page is good, but everything else is not. I did not know where to start reading the contents.
Readability
Texts are clear, with readable fonts. Even though the resolution is good, the texts need to be larger for those with eye problems.
Other comments
They are obviously attempt to make the site attractive with their display of colors. This can be distractive at times.
No comments:
Post a Comment